The Dutch version of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire is an appropriate instrument for measuring patients' perceptions in acute low back pain patients, showing acceptable internal consistency and reliability. Concurrent validity is adequate, however, the instrument may be unsuitable for detecting changes in low back pain perception over time.
LINK
Background: Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.Method: Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.Results: Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.Conclusion: The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.
Objective: The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a self-report user-friendly questionnaire for assessing multidimensional frailty among community-dwelling older people. The main aim of this study is to re-evaluate the validity of the TFI, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, focusing on the predictive value of the total TFI and its physical, psychological, and social domains for adverse outcomes disability, indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. Methods: The validity of the TFI was determined in a sample of 180 Dutch communitydwelling older people aged 70 years and older. The participants completed questionnaires including the TFI, the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) for assessing disability, and questions with regard to health care utilization and falls in 2016 and again one year later. Results: The physical and psychological domains of the TFI were significantly correlated as expected with adverse outcomes disability, many indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. Regression analyses showed that physical frailty was mostly responsible for the effect of frailty on the adverse outcomes. The cross-sectional and longitudinal predictive validity of total frailty with respect to disability and receiving personal care was excellent, evidenced by Areas Under the Curves (AUCs) >0.8. In most cases, using the cut-off point 5 for total frailty ensured the best values for sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: The present study provided new, additional evidence for the validity of the TFI for assessing frailty in Dutch community-dwelling older people aiming to prevent or delay adverse outcomes, including disability.
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a major problem. In the USA alone there are 15 million people with an AUD and more than 950,000 Dutch people drink excessively. Worldwide, 3-8% of all deaths and 5% of all illnesses and injuries are attributable to AUD. Care faces challenges. For example, more than half of AUD patients relapse within a year of treatment. A solution for this is the use of Cue-Exposure-Therapy (CET). Clients are exposed to triggers through objects, people and environments that arouse craving. Virtual Reality (VRET) is used to experience these triggers in a realistic, safe, and personalized way. In this way, coping skills are trained to counteract alcohol cravings. The effectiveness of VRET has been (clinically) proven. However, the advent of AR technologies raises the question of exploring possibilities of Augmented-Reality-Exposure-Therapy (ARET). ARET enjoys the same benefits as VRET (such as a realistic safe experience). But because AR integrates virtual components into the real environment, with the body visible, it presumably evokes a different type of experience. This may increase the ecological validity of CET in treatment. In addition, ARET is cheaper to develop (fewer virtual elements) and clients/clinics have easier access to AR (via smartphone/tablet). In addition, new AR glasses are being developed, which solve disadvantages such as a smartphone screen that is too small. Despite the demand from practitioners, ARET has never been developed and researched around addiction. In this project, the first ARET prototype is developed around AUD in the treatment of alcohol addiction. The prototype is being developed based on Volumetric-Captured-Digital-Humans and made accessible for AR glasses, tablets and smartphones. The prototype will be based on RECOVRY, a VRET around AUD developed by the consortium. A prototype test among (ex)AUD clients will provide insight into needs and points for improvement from patient and care provider and into the effect of ARET compared to VRET.
met Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Lichamelijke opvoeding en Kinesitherapie, in kader van Movement and Rehabilitation Fellowship aan de VUB van lector Harriet Jager-Wittenaar.
Inzet van serious games als scholingsinstrument voor zorgprofessionals of als patiëntinterventie neemt sterk toe. Serious games kunnen kosten besparen en zorgkwaliteit verbeteren. (Potentiële) afnemers vragen, in lijn met het medische onderzoeksparadigma, vaak naar de klinische effectiviteit (internal validity) van deze games. Het gros van de Nederlandse game-ontwikkelaars bestaat echter uit kleine ondernemingen die het aan middelen en expertise ontbreekt om de hiervoor benodigde longitudinale onderzoekstrajecten uit te voeren. Tegelijkertijd tonen mkb’ers, meestal zonder ervan bewust te zijn, tijdens het game-ontwikkelproces al verschillende validiteitsvormen aan volgens het design-onderzoeksparadigma (face validity, construct validity, e.d.). Door dit niet bij hun afnemers kenbaar te maken, komt een constructieve dialoog over validiteit moeilijk op gang en lopen mkb’ers opdrachten mis. Het ontbreekt hen aan een begrippenkader en praktische handvatten. Bestaande raamwerken zijn nog te theorie-gedreven. Om mkb’ers te helpen de 'clash' te overbruggen tussen het medische en het design-onderzoeksparadigma, ontwikkelen lectoraten ICT-innovaties in de Zorg (Hogeschool Windesheim, penvoerder) en Serious Gaming (NHL Stenden Hogeschool) samen met elf mkb’ers, afnemers, studenten en experts in een learning community drie hulpmiddelen: •Checklist: praktische mkb-richtlijnen voor het vaststellen van validiteit; •Beslisboom: op basis waarvan mkb’ers onderbouwd de juiste validatiemethode kunnenselecteren; •Serious game: om samen met (potentiële) afnemers te spelen, zodat verschillende soortenvaliditeit expliciet benoemd worden. De hulpmiddelen worden inhoudelijk gevoed door casestudies waarin mkb’ers gevolgd worden in hoe validiteit momenteel wordt vastgesteld en geëxpliciteerd in het ontwikkelproces. Vervolgens brengen we de ontworpen hulpmiddelen in de mkb-praktijk voor evaluatie. Opgeleverde hulpmiddelen stellen mkb’ers in staat werkbare validatiemethoden toe te passen gedurende het game-ontwikkelproces om acceptabele bewijslast op te leveren voor potentiële afnemers, waardoor hun marktpositie versterkt. Ook draagt het project bij aan operationalisering van bestaande raamwerken en kunnen de hulpmiddelen in game design-curricula worden geïncorporeerd.